Find Your Branch

The Truth About 2024 NAPS Goals—Coming Soon

The Truth About 2024 NAPS Goals—Coming Soon
By Ivan D. Butts
NAPS National President

Hello, NAPS brothers and sisters. In my February column titled “Fiscal Year 2024 PFP/NPA—A Step Behind,” I outlined the process for working with the USPS on FY24 PFP/NPA. The column was submitted to our editor on Jan. 10. On Jan. 24, UPMA sent out an email titled “NPA Goals” that was available on social media. I presume this email was in response to correspondence NAPS Headquarters sent out on Jan. 22 titled “Board Memo 008-2024: NAPS Response to USPS FY24 NPA Proposal.”

I highlight these dates because facts matter. At our recent LTS, Director of Legislative & Political Affairs Bob Levi referred to my prediction in my testimony before the Government Operations & the Federal Workforce Subcommittee concerning potential service declines as a result of implementing the “Delivering for America” (DFA) plan as “prophetic.” I don’t know about that, but, regardless, I’m glad I decided to write about the PFP/NPA process in all transparency on Jan. 10—14 days before UPMA sent out its message opposed to NAPS’ response to the Postal Service’s FY24 NPA proposal.

I found a couple statements in UPMA’s Jan. 24 email troubling:

The first statement—“UPMA consulted on the numeric goals two months ago and responded within the day when presented with a final package.”

At that time (two months ago), there was only one package to be considered, which I stated in my Postal Supervisor column and document here in an attachment. The USPS package labeled six goals “Under Construction.” These six critical indicators account for 25% of your NPA—your money!

Why in the world would UPMA accept this? Is this how it demonstrates its support for fair and equitable pay for postmasters—the only group of EAS employees this association is authorized under law to represent in matters of pay policies?

The second statement—“It is not our role to accept or reject goals.”

If that is true, then why are we given proposals for goals? Why does Title 39 give us the right to “participate directly in the planning and development of pay policies and schedules, fringe benefit programs, and other programs relating to superviso-y and other managerial employees?”

NAPS’ lawsuit against UPMA and the USPS over EAS pay affirmed this. UPMA’s leadership is doing a great disservice to the approximately 50% of postmasters who have yet to join NAPS in our fight for EAS pay. UPMA is fighting against improving EAS pay and accepting PFP/NPA processes that, at that time, were not even finalized.

The courts have determined the USPS is entitled to a pay-for-performance (PFP) program; NAPS does not dispute this fact. However, that does not exempt the USPS from the requirements in federal law to give full and fair consideration to NAPS’ recommendations in deciding whether or how to proceed with a program, such as PFP/NPA, as well as “provide compensation, working conditions, and career opportunities that will assure the attraction and retention of qualified and capable supervisory and other managerial personnel.”

Should NAPS have been concerned about EAS employees’ ability to achieve their goals in the USPS-enacted PFP program? “Yes!” NAPS cares that 46% of EAS employees will not reach cell block 5 in Competitive Composite if performance is identical to FY23. And 19% of EAS employees will not reach cell block 5 in TOE if performance is identical to FY23.

NAPS sees challenges for EAS employees to achieve all PFP/NPA target indicators across the board, especially with the current impacts as a result of the implementation of DFA going into Quarter III of the fiscal year.

The truth is NAPS continues to sit at the table and work with the Postal Service to have a PFP/NPA program that is fair and equitable for all EAS employees. We continue to meet and look for ways to help all EAS employees achieve the most they can out of this system. However, a part of the process also requires NAPS Headquarters to take a position—accept or reject it.

Take another look at the “Work in Progress” attachment. UPMA accepted it; would you?

In solidarity…